Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[belsarius]

I think a lot of the younger position pushing to the right goes to the social media influence. Youth have a lot more exposure to the 30 second soundbite and less of an attention span to do the further digging into a topic. It's easy to make fun of the "noun the verb" but it resonates well in a tiktok clip. One thing the right has always done better than the left is messaging.

And if they have strong youth support that also helps explain the education narrative as the GenX/Millenial generations were hyperfocused on the bachelors degree compared to the Gen Z who just want a job. There will be a section of those 18-29 who haven't completed a 4 year degree yet, and forget about a post-doctorate by 29 in this day and age of having to find a way to pay for it.

So I think trying to ply the "older people get more conservative" or "conservative base is uneducated" ends in fallacy and there is way more nuance than polls like these can really show.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

Not speaking to disenfranchised young men could be the biggest risk any liberal government in any Western nation faces. Kamala ignored them completely.


These are the guys voting based on what Joe Rogan & Jordan Peterson tell them to be angry about.
They do have legitimate problems as they're falling behind on education, earnings, inability to mate, very low social status, massive suicide rates etc..
But the modern conservative movements do a good job at pretending they're looking out for these guys, while completely exploiting them.

So do they have poor outcomes and life issues because they listen tot he ramblings of morons? Or do they listen to the ramblings of morons because they have poor outcomes?

The bottom line always comes back to massive income inequality and hoarding of wealth. There is no other all encompassing property that can account for the problems society is facing. It's just that no politician seems to be able to address it, because the wealthy and corporations hold all the power.

So perhaps if Joe and Jordan discussed the actual sources of the problems and targets for their solutions, we could get somewhere. Instead they just find a way to punch down at the vulnerable and blame them. But then, Joe is getting pretty ####ing rich from the same system, so...

The reality is youth's being indoctrinated with Conservative talking points are just going to shill for the wealthy (Elon-stans, MAGA) while their own lives fall to pieces, and they wonder why nothing but piss is trickling down.

[CliffFletcher]

Only around a third of 25-34 year old men in Canada have a university degree. The perceived value of a degree (as opposed to focused vocational training) has been declining for a while. It's a mistake to correlate young Canadians with university students and graduates.

So yeah, if liberals culturally and political dismiss young, working-class men, the populist right is happy to invite them inside the tent. And there are more them than we might assume.

[Johnny Makarov]

Ok Rightwing deplorables in Canada. You only have one job. Re-elect Pierre Polyester as your dear leader!!

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

That narrative is decades old(they died). Seniors vote Liberals now.

https://abacusdata.ca/where-the-cons...ublic-opinion/


It's the youths inundated with social media bull#### that are falling for false narratives because we've failed at educating them properly. And you don't need an advanced education to learn media literacy. Hell, you are proof an advanced education does not confer that.

Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang

Interestingly, the CPC have the highest support among 18-29 year olds, and it declines as age increases. The LPC are the opposite - highest among older voters, and lower among younger voters.

https://abacusdata.ca/new-year-same-...stay-cautious/

I would take that Abacus data with a bit of a grain of salt. Other pollsters aren't seeing the same thing, and even Abacus' data is shifting wildly. Here's January:

Overall: LPC: 40; CPC: 40
18-29: LPC: 25; CPC: 50

But then here's December:

Overall: LPC: 41; CPC; 41
18-29: LPC: 39; CPC: 39

I have trouble believing that the 18-29 numbers shifted by 25 points while the overall was essentially identical between the two polls.

Basically every other quality pollster that breaks it out by age shows the Conservatives' primary demographic being middle aged people. U30 or U35 are split pretty evenly and seniors lean Liberal.

[The Fonz]

When did seniors start leaning Liberal? Is this a recent development?

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang

Interestingly, the CPC have the highest support among 18-29 year olds, and it declines as age increases. The LPC are the opposite - highest among older voters, and lower among younger voters.

Makes sense to me.

The economic outlook for 18-30 year olds is bleak, unless they come from money. They aren't chosing to go to university because most university degrees to not move anyone closer to economic stability.

Young voters are footing the bill for the social safety nets the people in their 60s are enjoying. While not being able to access the same opportunities that people in their 60s had when they were young adults.

Couple that with the fact the LPC has governed most of their adult life, and are associated (rightly or wrongly) with pretty significant disruptions, like covid lock downs.

This trend absolutely cannot be explain away with comments like "right wingers dumb" because the root of their frustrations are real, even if the solutions the CPC promise are not.

[Fuzz]

The root of their frustrations boil down to income inequality and wealth hoarding(corporations consolidating global wealth). That can explain 95% of our current issues. Until someone is willing to say it and address it, it is kinda dumb to pretend that solutions being offered by Conservatives are anything but ways to extend and deepen the inequality while lying to followers about immigrants being the problem, and all the other blame dumping they like to do.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

The root of their frustrations boil down to income inequality and wealth hoarding(corporations consolidating global wealth). That can explain 95% of our current issues. Until someone is willing to say it and address it, it is kinda dumb to pretend that solutions being offered by Conservatives are anything but ways to extend and deepen the inequality while lying to followers about immigrants being the problem, and all the other blame dumping they like to do.

I think you're missing the plot here. The LPC represent the status quo. Where or not their policies lead to significant change in any direction is besides the point. The physical reality is that people under 35 do not have the same access to economic stability, or social welfare perks that were available to people who are 45 or older. They want that to change, and if their choice is between a party that has governed the last 14 years and any other option, they are going to choose the other option.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Those polls are kinda crazy. I guess I understand that the Libs and Cons are always going to be fairly close, but if we voted out Carney to bring in Pierre then we have failed ourselves as a nation.

[Flacker]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Who claimed that it did?

So how then is it whining? If there is a legitimate constraint on export capacity?

You very much implied we have nothing to complain about.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

I think you're missing the plot here. The LPC represent the status quo. Where or not their policies lead to significant change in any direction is besides the point. The physical reality is that people under 35 do not have the same access to economic stability, or social welfare perks that were available to people who are 45 or older. They want that to change, and if their choice is between a party that has governed the last 14 years and any other option, they are going to choose the other option.

I'm not missing the plot, I'm saying that the parties can all claim they'll fix those issues you mention, but the reality is those issues are unsolvable if you don't address wealth inequality. These issues are outcomes, not causes.

The reason young people don't have the opportunities and services their parents did is because there isn't enough public money to provide those things. The reason we need two income households to afford a home is because wealth has been robbed from workers in forms like decreased wages over time vs inflation and necessities of life going to far into profitability for corporations. That money then gets hoarded at the top, and is inaccessible for taxes and general societal use. This is an ongoing trend, and I don't need to pull out a graph to show where it inevitably ends if nothing changes.

I'm not saying the Liberals have a plan to fix this, but I am saying the Conservatives would do worse, because their guiding principles are why society is here in the first place. Nobody should expect a solution from them.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I'm not missing the plot, I'm saying that the parties can all claim they'll fix those issues you mention, but the reality is those issues are unsolvable if you don't address wealth inequality. These issues are outcomes, not causes.

The reason young people don't have the opportunities and services their parents did is because there isn't enough public money to provide those things. The reason we need two income households to afford a home is because wealth has been robbed from workers in forms like decreased wages over time vs inflation and necessities of life going to far into profitability for corporations. That money then gets hoarded at the top, and is inaccessible for taxes and general societal use. This is an ongoing trend, and I don't need to pull out a graph to show where it inevitably ends if nothing changes.

I'm not saying the Liberals have a plan to fix this, but I am saying the Conservatives would do worse, because their guiding principles are why society is here in the first place. Nobody should expect a solution from them.

To be perfectly clear, I am in no way endorsing the CPC, I am just trying to explain how younger Canadians leaning right is not due to the fact they are "Stupid" "Uneducated" or "brain washed by social media". I am arguing that qualifying them as such is more harmful than helpful. We are entering an era of radical politics. Alienating young people based on ideology without pragmatic sympathy is not going to end well.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

2 things.

One is that I’m not that interested in having a debate about it. I’m really not. Nobody is interested in changing their mind.

Two is that it is not the right framing. As if exporting the most oil ever is the right way to think about it, it isn’t. It doesn’t take into account consideration about a million things and lacks so much context and is so disingenuous it’s kinda tough to even know where to start.

Yes, everyone in oil and gas are whiny. And all they do is whine and they have no point to their whining and they have nothing to complain about and the country has done an amazing job for the industry to make sure it is all working really smoothly and competitively. Got it. You guys win the debate thing, now let’s continue to watch the Canadian economy slide.

Great, you don't have a point to make, so we don't need you to make a point. I personally think people are a lot more fluid in there opinions than you portray over long enough periods of time, it just might be a little less noticeable in the short term.

For example the median Canadian in the 2015 election carried a great deal of climate concern, and to the extent they were thinking about O&G, they were contemplating what a slow controlled wind down would look like. While in the 2025 election only 10 years later, the median Canadian was focusing on economic development as far as the O&G industry was concerned, a huge shift in only a 10 year period. I continue to believe that the first group was more correct on their merits while gravely miscalibrating their timelines, and the second group was is largely suck in the immediate paradigm without concern for how circumstances likely will change in the future, and neither is 100% accurate, but people definitely on average shifted from one to the other.

I think it is a strong argument that some are being disingenuous or at least deliberately reframing the facts which are that upon taking office Trudeau oversaw 4.5% of global oil production ~3.8M barrels. and upon leaving office it was 6% ~ 5.9M barrels, with a steady incline the entire way. Saying he decimated an industry that continued to grow under him not only in scale, but in market share too is blatantly false. Arguing that the business could have grown more under someone else is a fair opinion, and arguing over weather that would be a good or a bad think in terms of economic balance if fair too. But your statement was factually incorrect, and just not the right framing for what your complaint is.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

To be perfectly clear, I am in no way endorsing the CPC, I am just trying to explain how younger Canadians leaning right is not due to the fact they are "Stupid" "Uneducated" or "brain washed by social media". I am arguing that qualifying them as such is more harmful than helpful. We are entering an era of radical politics. Alienating young people based on ideology without pragmatic sympathy is not going to end well.

Then I guess I just disagree. "Stupid" probably isn't helpful, but they are uneducated if they believe that the solution lies with Conservative policies, and they are brainwashed by social media into these positions. They are told to blame all sorts of things that aren't the problem, but I'd be shocked to ever see one income inequality graph from any right of centre source, ever.

I understand why young people are leaning Conservative. I've identified those things for what they are. A lack of knowledge, and false narratives are a leading cause of why they put their faith in Conservatives for solutions. I can guarantee they will not find them there.

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

To be perfectly clear, I am in no way endorsing the CPC, I am just trying to explain how younger Canadians leaning right is not due to the fact they are "Stupid" "Uneducated" or "brain washed by social media". I am arguing that qualifying them as such is more harmful than helpful. We are entering an era of radical politics. Alienating young people based on ideology without pragmatic sympathy is not going to end well.

Not wanting to call anyone stupid, but if they were better equipped then they would probably see through PP and the CPC and their slogans and find a better alternative to meet their needs. They would demonstrate a stronger questioning attitude and do a better job of investigating and understanding the information out there. They would learn to filter out corporate owned media and see the lies of the conservatives as they preach populism while practicing authoritarianism.

PP demonstrates this constantly as he talks about the issues of the people and spends his time hanging out with billionaires a grifting huge amounts of money from them for himself and his party. He also shows his authoritarianism in how he runs the CPC. If anyone in the party says or does anything out of line they quickly are pulled back and you'd see official messaging coming out of PP's office walking back whatever they said or did and the MP in question would be muzzled.

It is fine to want change but embracing disastrous change is not the answer and as we watch America we can see just how things would play out under the CPC.

Canada has the benefit of having other options than the two status quo parties that have been the center of power for most of our history. If you want to break the system and make things better for the people then vote for the NDP or even the Green party. That is the message that all of those disenfranchised young voters need to hear but our media is so captured that the Conservative party is perpetually positioned as the only alternative to the Liberals even though fundamentally all Canadians should know that we do not have a 2 party system.

[woob]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

There's that, to some extent, but it's also that dem youts recognize that they're about to get royally screwed and have a worse life than their parents, and even less chance of prosperity than millenials who had to deal with the GFC and housing prices ballooning. They spent most of their formative years under LPC governments who they would, understandably, blame for not doing enough to reverse this trend, while talking about spending money on other priorities. And the angrier you happen to be about the status quo, the more the CPC - who under PP have clearly established themselves as the party of angry people who think they're getting screwed - might speak to you.

Carney gave a speech yesterday in which he lauded Canada as "the best place in the world to be a regular person". That should, in fact, be the main slogan or mantra of his iteration of the LPC, I think - maybe secondary to "we're the only adults in the room here".

[chemgear]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

Makes sense to me.

The economic outlook for 18-30 year olds is bleak, unless they come from money. They aren't chosing to go to university because most university degrees to not move anyone closer to economic stability.

Young voters are footing the bill for the social safety nets the people in their 60s are enjoying. While not being able to access the same opportunities that people in their 60s had when they were young adults.

Couple that with the fact the LPC has governed most of their adult life, and are associated (rightly or wrongly) with pretty significant disruptions, like covid lock downs.

This trend absolutely cannot be explain away with comments like "right wingers dumb" because the root of their frustrations are real, even if the solutions the CPC promise are not.

NSFW!

#avacadotoast

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by #-3

Great, you don't have a point to make, so we don't need you to make a point. I personally think people are a lot more fluid in there opinions than you portray over long enough periods of time, it just might be a little less noticeable in the short term.

For example the median Canadian in the 2015 election carried a great deal of climate concern, and to the extent they were thinking about O&G, they were contemplating what a slow controlled wind down would look like. While in the 2025 election only 10 years later, the median Canadian was focusing on economic development as far as the O&G industry was concerned, a huge shift in only a 10 year period. I continue to believe that the first group was more correct on their merits while gravely miscalibrating their timelines, and the second group was is largely suck in the immediate paradigm without concern for how circumstances likely will change in the future, and neither is 100% accurate, but people definitely on average shifted from one to the other.

I think it is a strong argument that some are being disingenuous or at least deliberately reframing the facts which are that upon taking office Trudeau oversaw 4.5% of global oil production ~3.8M barrels. and upon leaving office it was 6% ~ 5.9M barrels, with a steady incline the entire way. Saying he decimated an industry that continued to grow under him not only in scale, but in market share too is blatantly false. Arguing that the business could have grown more under someone else is a fair opinion, and arguing over weather that would be a good or a bad think in terms of economic balance if fair too. But your statement was factually incorrect, and just not the right framing for what your complaint is.

Cool

[troutman]

Katy Perry: 'I'm having Justin Trudeau's baby'